US6269276B1 - Multi-rule quality control method and apparatus - Google Patents

Multi-rule quality control method and apparatus Download PDF

Info

Publication number
US6269276B1
US6269276B1 US09/052,613 US5261398A US6269276B1 US 6269276 B1 US6269276 B1 US 6269276B1 US 5261398 A US5261398 A US 5261398A US 6269276 B1 US6269276 B1 US 6269276B1
Authority
US
United States
Prior art keywords
medically significant
concentrations
results
control
significant components
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Expired - Fee Related
Application number
US09/052,613
Inventor
Kamran Akhavan
Laurian I. Rusu
Gary K. Scarr
Mark J. Simmons
Dale L. Wedel
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Roche Diagnostics Corp
Original Assignee
Roche Diagnostics Corp
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Roche Diagnostics Corp filed Critical Roche Diagnostics Corp
Priority to US09/052,613 priority Critical patent/US6269276B1/en
Assigned to BOEHRINGER MANNHEIM CORPORATION reassignment BOEHRINGER MANNHEIM CORPORATION ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: SIMMONS, MARK J., AKHAVAN, KAMRAN, RUSU, LAURIAN I., SCARR, GARY K., WEDEL, DALE L.
Assigned to ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION reassignment ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: BOEHRINGER MANNHEIM CORPORATION
Priority to CA002266960A priority patent/CA2266960A1/en
Priority to EP99105107A priority patent/EP0962872A3/en
Priority to JP11084876A priority patent/JPH11326333A/en
Priority to JP11129023A priority patent/JPH11337555A/en
Application granted granted Critical
Publication of US6269276B1 publication Critical patent/US6269276B1/en
Anticipated expiration legal-status Critical
Expired - Fee Related legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • GPHYSICS
    • G16INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR SPECIFIC APPLICATION FIELDS
    • G16HHEALTHCARE INFORMATICS, i.e. INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR THE HANDLING OR PROCESSING OF MEDICAL OR HEALTHCARE DATA
    • G16H10/00ICT specially adapted for the handling or processing of patient-related medical or healthcare data
    • G16H10/40ICT specially adapted for the handling or processing of patient-related medical or healthcare data for data related to laboratory analysis, e.g. patient specimen analysis
    • GPHYSICS
    • G16INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR SPECIFIC APPLICATION FIELDS
    • G16HHEALTHCARE INFORMATICS, i.e. INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR THE HANDLING OR PROCESSING OF MEDICAL OR HEALTHCARE DATA
    • G16H40/00ICT specially adapted for the management or administration of healthcare resources or facilities; ICT specially adapted for the management or operation of medical equipment or devices
    • G16H40/40ICT specially adapted for the management or administration of healthcare resources or facilities; ICT specially adapted for the management or operation of medical equipment or devices for the management of medical equipment or devices, e.g. scheduling maintenance or upgrades
    • GPHYSICS
    • G16INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR SPECIFIC APPLICATION FIELDS
    • G16HHEALTHCARE INFORMATICS, i.e. INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR THE HANDLING OR PROCESSING OF MEDICAL OR HEALTHCARE DATA
    • G16H50/00ICT specially adapted for medical diagnosis, medical simulation or medical data mining; ICT specially adapted for detecting, monitoring or modelling epidemics or pandemics
    • G16H50/20ICT specially adapted for medical diagnosis, medical simulation or medical data mining; ICT specially adapted for detecting, monitoring or modelling epidemics or pandemics for computer-aided diagnosis, e.g. based on medical expert systems
    • GPHYSICS
    • G01MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01NINVESTIGATING OR ANALYSING MATERIALS BY DETERMINING THEIR CHEMICAL OR PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
    • G01N33/00Investigating or analysing materials by specific methods not covered by groups G01N1/00 - G01N31/00
    • G01N33/48Biological material, e.g. blood, urine; Haemocytometers
    • G01N33/483Physical analysis of biological material
    • G01N33/487Physical analysis of biological material of liquid biological material

Definitions

  • This invention relates to laboratory information management systems of the type wherein one or more automated or partly automated laboratory instruments, for example, instruments for determining the concentrations of medically significant components of samples of body fluids and/or tissues from patients who have submitted such samples for testing, provide information such as identifying indicia and control solution test results to a programmable machine which is programmed to test such results against statistical quality control criteria defined by way of rules.
  • one or more automated or partly automated laboratory instruments for example, instruments for determining the concentrations of medically significant components of samples of body fluids and/or tissues from patients who have submitted such samples for testing, provide information such as identifying indicia and control solution test results to a programmable machine which is programmed to test such results against statistical quality control criteria defined by way of rules.
  • Laboratory information management systems are known generally. Some such systems permit the operator to select a rule against which one or a group of such results may be tested. Typically, the way in which this is done is that control solutions having known concentrations of a medically significant component of interest, for example, a hormone, are processed by the laboratory instrument right along with patient samples. The programmable machine then tests the laboratory instrument's concentration determination results against the known concentrations of the hormone in the various controls as determined by the laboratory instrument.
  • a medically significant component of interest for example, a hormone
  • the statistical quality control test might be, for example, “Is the reported result for the control solution within one standard deviation of the known concentration?” If the answer to such a test is “Yes,” the laboratory instrument's concentration determination process is considered to be in control, and testing to determine the concentration of the hormone in patient samples proceeds. If the answer to this question is “No,” the laboratory instrument's concentration determination process is considered to be out of control, and appropriate steps are taken to bring the process back into control and/or to retest the affected patient sample concentration determinations to provide more reliable results.
  • a system for analyzing the results of determinations of the concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions comprises a programmable machine, and a program executable on the machine for testing the results against a set of multiple rules and for producing indications to an operator of the results of the tests.
  • the system further comprises an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids and control solutions, and an interface for relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions to the programmable machine to be tested by the program.
  • the program for testing the results against multiple rules comprises a program for testing a result of a first determination of the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a first control solution against a first subset of the set of multiple rules, and subsequently testing a result of at least one of: a second determination; the concentration of a second medically significant component; a second sample; and, a second control solution against at least one of the first subset and a second subset of the set of multiple rules.
  • the instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids and control solutions comprises an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and different control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and different control solutions
  • the program comprises a program for instructing the instrument to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and different control solutions
  • the system further comprises an interface for relaying instructions from the programmable machine to the instrument.
  • system further comprises a second instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids and control solutions, and an interface for relaying the results of determinations by the second instrument to the programmable machine to be tested by the program.
  • the instrument and the second instrument respectively comprise: an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions; and, a second instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions, and the program comprises a program for selectively instructing one of the instrument and the second instrument to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions, the system further comprising an interface for relaying instructions from the programmable machine to the one of the instrument and the second instrument.
  • a method for analyzing the results of determinations of the concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions comprises the steps of providing a programmable machine, testing the results on the machine against a set of multiple rules, and producing indications to an operator of the results of the tests.
  • the method further comprises the step of sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of control solutions and body fluids, and relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions to the programmable machine to be tested by the program.
  • testing the results against multiple rules comprises testing a result of a first determination of the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a first control solution against a first subset of the set of multiple rules and subsequently testing a result of at least one of: a second determination; the concentration of a second medically significant component; a second sample; and, a second control solution against at least one of the first subset and a second subset of the set of multiple rules.
  • sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids and control solutions comprises sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions, instructing the determination of the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions, and relaying instructions from the programmable machine to the instrument.
  • testing the results against the set of multiple rules comprises testing a result of a first determination of the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a first control solution against a first subset of the set of multiple rules and subsequently testing a result of at least one of: a second determination; the concentration of a second medically significant component; a second sample; and, a second control solution against at least one of the first subset and a second subset of the set of multiple rules.
  • FIGS. 1-12 illustrate certain screens generated by an apparatus and method according to the present invention.
  • FIGS. 13-16 illustrate flow diagrams of program modules for conducting a method according to the present invention on an apparatus according to the present invention.
  • Multi-rule statistical quality control strategies employ combinations of rules to achieve lower incidences of false rejects for the same probability of detecting a given size error than single rule statistical quality control strategies can.
  • the rules employed in implementing such strategies can include, for example, combinations of two or more of the following rules.
  • “W” means within a run; and, “A” means across runs.
  • a “run” is a quality interval, that is, a length of time or number of events, such as, for example, an eight hour shift or other stable interval between calibrations of the equipment from which quality data is being monitored. This run length is typically selected based upon the test the quality interval of which is being established and the laboratory instrument upon which the testing is being conducted:
  • M ⁇ barwW or M ⁇ barwA—m control results are all greater than or all less than a common control's known concentration
  • M ⁇ baraW or M ⁇ baraA—m control results are all greater than or all less than their respective controls' known concentrations
  • the standard deviation index is a normalized deviation scale expressed in units of standard deviations of a data set. For example, for a data set with a standard deviation of 12 mmol., the standard deviation index of a measurement with a deviation of 30 mmol. would be 2.5. This is sometimes written as 2.5 SDI;
  • RkswS or RksaS cross systems (for example, different laboratory instruments whose outputs are being tested against the rules by a common programmable machine or network including such machines—as used in this application, the term programmable machine includes both), the absolute value of the difference between the SDI of the current control result and the SDI of each selected control result is greater than k; and,
  • the disclosed multi-rule QC system may be an add-on to an existing laboratory instrument management program such as, for example, the Laboratory Systems Manager (hereinafter sometimes referred to as LSM), available from Boehringer Mannheim Corporation, 9115 Hague Road, Indianapolis, Ind. 46250.
  • LSM Laboratory Systems Manager
  • the multi-rule QC approach is based upon the assumption that an analytical technique is stable within limits determined statistically from past performance except when certain events occur which have a significant probability of affecting that stability, such as, for example, the previously mentioned recalibration, cycling the power to an instrument off and on, and so on.
  • patient test results are released continuously (referred to in the statistical quality control art as an open run) without waiting for a subsequent control check (referred to in the statistical quality control art as a bracketed run) of the stability of the instrument from which those results are generated.
  • control checks are performed in a manner calculated statistically to provide a predetermined probability of detecting deviations of a predetermined magnitude, usually a medically significant magnitude.
  • the results are evaluated by combinations of the multiple rules which specify the allowable variance within a set of results. Sets of results can include data from multiple control materials, multiple instruments, and multiple analytical modules within a single laboratory instrument.
  • the suite of rules defines when a process is considered in control and when it may be out of control.
  • the system can be configured to automate the release of patient results while the suite of rules against which the control results are being tested indicates that a process by which the control and patient results are generated is in control, and to automatically block the release of the results as soon as the suite of rules against which the control results are being tested indicates that the process being conducted by the laboratory instrument producing the results is out of control.
  • the system and method according to the invention also support the bracketing mode. As previously noted, in the bracketing mode, patient results are held until results of the testing of one or more controls by the instrument are evaluated by the multi-rule strategy.
  • the patient results are released, for example, to a patient results data base.
  • the multi-rule quality control testing method and apparatus can be integrated into laboratory system data handling and management software.
  • the multi-rule process and apparatus are implemented as components of the LSM, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.
  • LSM information, prompts, etc.
  • information, prompts, etc. are displayed to the operator on screens designed to resemble hanging file folders.
  • the tabs at the tops of the various folders select those folders. Selection of one of the folders causes that screen, its contents, menu, etc., to be displayed to the operator.
  • the screens which are accessed by the multi-rule method and apparatus in the illustrated embodiment include a test status screen which displays the status, for example, in control (indicated by a green circle), caution (indicated by a yellow circle containing an exclamation mark), and out of control (indicated by a red circle containing an “X.”
  • the test status screen also illustrates a list of events affecting quality control, violations produced by rule failures, and details of the control results associated with each failure. From this screen, an operator can also manually control the status of a test and view a log of all manual operator QC events and interactions. Any comments added by operators in connection with manual operator QC events and interactions can also be viewed and edited.
  • the screens also include a multi-rule QC rules administration screen. Using this screen the operator can select the operating mode for a test, for example, whether the test will be performed as an open run or as a bracketed run. This screen permits the operator to select the run length. If the control result(s) being tested is (are) part of an open run, data from patient samples will be automatically released to a patient result data base if the multi-rule testing of the control result(s) indicates that the process by which the patient and control results are obtained is in control.
  • control result(s) being tested is (are) part of a bracketed run, data from patient samples lying within the brackets will be held until the multi-rule testing of the control result(s) which close(s) the run indicate(s) that the process is in control.
  • This screen also permits the operator to select the statistical quality control rules against which the control results are to be tested for QC purposes.
  • This screen also prompts the operator to designate any parameters required to be designated for any selected rule, such as, for example, the k in 1 ⁇ ks. For rules which are to be applied across systems, that is across different laboratory instruments, this screen permits the operator to select which system will be the reference system for testing.
  • this screen permits any selected rule to force a test into either a caution or out of control state when testing indicates that the process is out of control.
  • An illustrative multi-rule QC rules administration screen is illustrated in FIG. 5 .
  • Illustrative QC rule settings are illustrated in Table 2.
  • a control definition screen permits the operator to establish quality control-specific parameters of control materials, such as, for example, mean values and standard deviations of the biologically significant components of those controls. This screen also permits designation of a particular lot of material as a process control lot or study lot. A study lot is a lot which is used in statistical calculations, but not in the multi-rule quality control strategy for controlling the process. Illustrative control definition screens, pages 1 and 2 , are illustrated in FIGS. 6-7.
  • a QC results screen permits the operator to view control results in detail.
  • the operator can exclude or include control results from the long term quality control statistics as well as delete ones which are the result of gross operator errors, such as the misidentification of a material.
  • An illustrative QC results screen is illustrated in FIG. 8 .
  • a patient validation screen permits functions similar to the QC results screen, but also permits the viewing and disposition of patient results in the context of their associated control results.
  • a comment administration screen permits entry of comments which can then be selected from a menu.
  • a comment dialog is presented to the operator for the entry of text, either to add text to an existing comment or to provide a new comment.
  • the method and apparatus of the present invention will typically be configured to automatically present the dialog whenever the operator performs certain actions such as forcing (a) result(s) into an out of control condition or into an in control condition, excluding (a) control result(s), and so on.
  • This screen is intended to encourage the operator to enter comments to help document and explain such actions. This supports a laboratory policy of encouraging operators to comment by offering an opportunity for them to do so, or enforcing the entry of comments where appropriate.
  • An illustrative comment administration screen is illustrated in FIG. 11 .
  • a user access rights administration screen permits the system to be tailored to varying levels of access by different operators. For example, some operators may be permitted to access all system screens while others are permitted to access only certain screens.
  • An illustrative user access rights administration screen is illustrated in FIG. 12 .
  • Two background modules provide most of the internal functions of the multi-rule QC system.
  • the run module monitors the receipt of control and patient results from the various laboratory instruments whose results the system is monitoring, passes control results to the other module, a rules evaluation module, and modifies the status of a test according to the evaluation results. After checking patient results for normal ranges, etc., the run module can automatically release a patient result if the corresponding test status is in control and the rule against which the associated control is tested is operating in open run mode. If the rule is operating in bracketing mode, the run module does not release a patient result until the module has received and tested sufficient control results to establish that the entire bracketed run is in control.
  • the run module also provides certain services to the various screens to support operator actions, such as forcing a control result into an out of control condition or into an in control condition, deleting or excluding a result, and so on, and updating information for display on all screens.
  • the rule evaluation module is the background module which is responsible for evaluating control results against the selected QC rules. This module keeps sufficient information about the most recent control results to be able to evaluate each control result against all selected rules as each control result is received. The rule evaluation module passes this information to the run module where patient results are completely evaluated as soon as they are received from the various laboratory instrument interfaces. Except when bracketing mode is enabled, the system continuously evaluates and releases patient results to the patient results data base.
  • the flow diagram illustrated in FIG. 13 illustrates validation of results obtained from a laboratory instrument through an appropriate interface. As each result is provided to the system of the invention, it is identified as either a control result or a patient result. If the result is identified as a control result, it is next determined whether the result is a process control result. If the result is identified as a process control result, it is tested against the selected statistical quality control rules. See FIG. 14 . If the system and method are not operating in bracketing mode, results passing testing against the selected statistical quality control rules are supplied to the QC test status data base. If the system and method are operating in bracketing mode, and the end of the bracket has not yet been reached, the results are added to the long term quality control data base.
  • the decision is first reached whether more rules are selected or configured. If not, the system and method have finished testing the result against the selected rules. If so, the system and method get the next rule against which the result is to be tested. The system and method determine whether all results required by the rule to conduct the indicated test are available. If not, the status of the test is indicated as incomplete, and the system and method return to determine if all results required by the rule to conduct the indicated test are available. If so, the system and method determine whether the rule has been violated by the result. If not, the process is indicated as being in control with respect to that particular rule, and the system and method return to test the result against the next rule. If the rule is determined to have been violated, the severity of the violation is ascertained.
  • the system and method will not reduce the severity of system status with respect to a selected rule, for example, change an indication of the system status with respect to a selected rule from red to yellow, red to green, or yellow to green. An operator must intervene to achieve this. However, the system and method will increase the severity of the system status with respect to a selected rule, for example, change it from green to red, green to yellow, or yellow to red, automatically whenever such action is warranted by the results of testing.
  • the system and method first determine if the QC test status is indicated as out of control. If so, a result is marked with a QC error and blocked. The result is saved to the data base and the QC test status validation is complete. If the QC test status is not indicated as being out of control, the timing of the result is ascertained. If the result is prior in time to the most recent determination, based upon testing of a control, that the process is in control, the result is blocked. Underlying this action is the assumption that the QC test must have indicated that the process being tested was out of control prior to the most recent event indicated to be in control.
  • the system and method next determine whether the result has been blocked. If so, the result is saved to the data base. If not, the system and method next determine whether bracketing is enabled. If so, the result's state is set to QC pending, pending testing of the bracket closing control's(s') result(s) against the selected rule(s). The result is then saved to the data base. If bracketing is not enabled, the result is released to be saved to the data base. Once the result is saved to the data base, QC test status validation is complete.
  • the system and method first determine whether the result has been generated on a laboratory instrument already flagged for some reason. This might occur, for example, if the operator already is aware that the instrument is in need of service, etc. If the instrument has already been flagged, the result is marked “instrument flagged,” and the result is blocked from passage to the data base. If the instrument is not flagged, the test is next validated against the normal ranges for the test. The best matching normal range for the test is identified, and the test is validated against that range. If no normal range for the test is identified, the result is so marked, and, depending on the setting of a file in the system, the result may be blocked.
  • the result is marked, and, depending on the setting of a file in the system, the result may be blocked.
  • the test is validated against the normal range, or, where no normal range can be found, the result is marked as having no normal range, or where the test is not validated against a normal range, the test is next validated against prior results for the same patient. If there are no prior results in the patient data base for the patient, the result is so marked. If there are prior results in the data base for the patient, the percentage change is checked against the allowable change, the result is marked with that change, and, depending on the setting of a configuration file in the system, the result may be blocked. Once the result is marked with a percentage change, or, where no prior patient data exists, marked to indicate that such marking is not possible, or where the test is not validated against prior patient results, the technical validation is complete.

Abstract

A method and apparatus for analyzing the results of determinations of the concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions comprise providing a programmable machine, executing on the machine a program which tests the results against a set of statistical quality control rules, and producing indications to an operator of the results of the tests. Illustratively, (a) laboratory analytical instrument(s) run(s) the control solutions interspersed among patient samples, the concentrations of medically significant components of which are determined by the laboratory instrument(s). The quality of the laboratory instrument's(s') process(es) for determining the concentrations of the medically significant components of the patient samples are monitored by testing the outcomes of the concentration determinations of the control solutions against the set of QC rules. The QC testing process is conducted as the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions are determined, so that delays between the determination of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the patient samples and the determination of the state of control of the process(es) by which those concentrations are determined are minimized.

Description

FIELD OF THE INVENTION
This invention relates to laboratory information management systems of the type wherein one or more automated or partly automated laboratory instruments, for example, instruments for determining the concentrations of medically significant components of samples of body fluids and/or tissues from patients who have submitted such samples for testing, provide information such as identifying indicia and control solution test results to a programmable machine which is programmed to test such results against statistical quality control criteria defined by way of rules.
DESCRIPTION OF THE BACKGROUND ART
Laboratory information management systems are known generally. Some such systems permit the operator to select a rule against which one or a group of such results may be tested. Typically, the way in which this is done is that control solutions having known concentrations of a medically significant component of interest, for example, a hormone, are processed by the laboratory instrument right along with patient samples. The programmable machine then tests the laboratory instrument's concentration determination results against the known concentrations of the hormone in the various controls as determined by the laboratory instrument.
The statistical quality control test, or rule, might be, for example, “Is the reported result for the control solution within one standard deviation of the known concentration?” If the answer to such a test is “Yes,” the laboratory instrument's concentration determination process is considered to be in control, and testing to determine the concentration of the hormone in patient samples proceeds. If the answer to this question is “No,” the laboratory instrument's concentration determination process is considered to be out of control, and appropriate steps are taken to bring the process back into control and/or to retest the affected patient sample concentration determinations to provide more reliable results.
There are various sources of statistical quality control rules. Examples of collections of such rules are the so-called Rilibak rules and the Westgard rules, attributed to Dr. James O. Westgard. Westgard statistical quality control has been implemented manually in the control of processes using Shewhart charts. These statistical quality control strategies, while effective, permitted only off-line, non-real time testing of process results against the statistical quality control rules. What this ordinarily meant in the manufacturing context, for example, is that by the time statisticians became aware that a manufacturing process was out of control, several potentially non-conforming units of manufacture had already been produced. This, of course, typically dictated that further quality checking be performed on suspected non-conforming units of manufacture, and/or corrective action be taken as necessary.
DISCLOSURE OF THE INVENTION
According to an aspect of the invention, a system for analyzing the results of determinations of the concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions comprises a programmable machine, and a program executable on the machine for testing the results against a set of multiple rules and for producing indications to an operator of the results of the tests.
Illustratively according to this aspect of the invention, the system further comprises an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids and control solutions, and an interface for relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions to the programmable machine to be tested by the program.
Further illustratively according to this aspect of the invention, the program for testing the results against multiple rules comprises a program for testing a result of a first determination of the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a first control solution against a first subset of the set of multiple rules, and subsequently testing a result of at least one of: a second determination; the concentration of a second medically significant component; a second sample; and, a second control solution against at least one of the first subset and a second subset of the set of multiple rules.
Additionally illustratively according to this aspect of the invention, the instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids and control solutions comprises an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and different control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and different control solutions, and the program comprises a program for instructing the instrument to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and different control solutions, and the system further comprises an interface for relaying instructions from the programmable machine to the instrument.
Additionally according to this aspect of the invention, the system further comprises a second instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids and control solutions, and an interface for relaying the results of determinations by the second instrument to the programmable machine to be tested by the program.
Further illustratively according to this aspect of the invention, the instrument and the second instrument respectively comprise: an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions; and, a second instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions, and the program comprises a program for selectively instructing one of the instrument and the second instrument to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions, the system further comprising an interface for relaying instructions from the programmable machine to the one of the instrument and the second instrument.
According to another aspect of the invention, a method for analyzing the results of determinations of the concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions comprises the steps of providing a programmable machine, testing the results on the machine against a set of multiple rules, and producing indications to an operator of the results of the tests.
Illustratively according to this aspect of the invention, the method further comprises the step of sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of control solutions and body fluids, and relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions to the programmable machine to be tested by the program.
Additionally according to this aspect of the invention, testing the results against multiple rules comprises testing a result of a first determination of the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a first control solution against a first subset of the set of multiple rules and subsequently testing a result of at least one of: a second determination; the concentration of a second medically significant component; a second sample; and, a second control solution against at least one of the first subset and a second subset of the set of multiple rules.
Further according to this aspect of the invention, sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids and control solutions comprises sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions, instructing the determination of the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions, and relaying instructions from the programmable machine to the instrument.
Additionally illustratively according to this aspect of the invention, testing the results against the set of multiple rules comprises testing a result of a first determination of the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a first control solution against a first subset of the set of multiple rules and subsequently testing a result of at least one of: a second determination; the concentration of a second medically significant component; a second sample; and, a second control solution against at least one of the first subset and a second subset of the set of multiple rules.
BRIEF DESCRIPTIONS OF ILLUSTRATIVE DRAWINGS
The invention may best be understood by referring to the following detailed description and accompanying drawings which illustrate the invention. In the drawings:
FIGS. 1-12 illustrate certain screens generated by an apparatus and method according to the present invention; and,
FIGS. 13-16 illustrate flow diagrams of program modules for conducting a method according to the present invention on an apparatus according to the present invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS OF SPECIFIC EMBODIMENTS
Multi-rule statistical quality control strategies employ combinations of rules to achieve lower incidences of false rejects for the same probability of detecting a given size error than single rule statistical quality control strategies can. The rules employed in implementing such strategies can include, for example, combinations of two or more of the following rules. In the following rules, “ks,” where k is an integer, means k standard deviations; “W” means within a run; and, “A” means across runs. A “run” is a quality interval, that is, a length of time or number of events, such as, for example, an eight hour shift or other stable interval between calibrations of the equipment from which quality data is being monitored. This run length is typically selected based upon the test the quality interval of which is being established and the laboratory instrument upon which the testing is being conducted:
1×2s—a control result was >two standard deviations in either direction from the known concentration of a control;
1×ks—a control result was >k standard deviations in either direction from the known concentration of a control;
2×2swW or 2×2swA—two control results are >two standard deviations in the same direction (that is, both low or both high) from a common control's known concentration;
2×2saW or 2×2saA—two control results are >two standard deviations in the same direction from their respective controls' known concentrations;
2 of 3×2swW or 2 of 3×swA—two of three control results are >two standard deviations in the same direction from a common control's known concentration;
3×1swW or 3×1swA—three control results are >one standard deviation in the same direction from a common control's known concentration;
3×1saW or 3×1saA—three control results are >one standard deviation in the same direction from their respective controls' known concentrations;
4×1swW or 4×1swA—four consecutive control results are >one standard deviation in the same direction from a common control's known concentration;
4×1saW or 4×1saA—four consecutive control results are >one standard deviation in the same direction from their respective controls' known concentrations;
M×barwW or M×barwA—m control results are all greater than or all less than a common control's known concentration;
M×baraW or M×baraA—m control results are all greater than or all less than their respective controls' known concentrations;
RkswW or RkswA—the absolute value of the difference between the standard deviation indices of any two control results is greater than k. The standard deviation index is a normalized deviation scale expressed in units of standard deviations of a data set. For example, for a data set with a standard deviation of 12 mmol., the standard deviation index of a measurement with a deviation of 30 mmol. would be 2.5. This is sometimes written as 2.5 SDI;
RkswS or RksaS—across systems (for example, different laboratory instruments whose outputs are being tested against the rules by a common programmable machine or network including such machines—as used in this application, the term programmable machine includes both), the absolute value of the difference between the SDI of the current control result and the SDI of each selected control result is greater than k; and,
MmonowW or MmonowA or MmonoaW or MmonoaA—the indicated concentrations of M controls are monotonically increasing or decreasing.
This listing of rules is not intended to be exhaustive. Other statistical quality control rules are available against which to test laboratory instrument results meaningfully. In this regard, reference is here made to the Rilibak and Westgard rules, which are incorporated herein by reference.
The disclosed multi-rule QC system may be an add-on to an existing laboratory instrument management program such as, for example, the Laboratory Systems Manager (hereinafter sometimes referred to as LSM), available from Boehringer Mannheim Corporation, 9115 Hague Road, Indianapolis, Ind. 46250. The multi-rule QC approach is based upon the assumption that an analytical technique is stable within limits determined statistically from past performance except when certain events occur which have a significant probability of affecting that stability, such as, for example, the previously mentioned recalibration, cycling the power to an instrument off and on, and so on. Within the contemplation of the invention, once an instrument has passed an initial calibration, patient test results are released continuously (referred to in the statistical quality control art as an open run) without waiting for a subsequent control check (referred to in the statistical quality control art as a bracketed run) of the stability of the instrument from which those results are generated. To enhance the reliability of the process, control checks are performed in a manner calculated statistically to provide a predetermined probability of detecting deviations of a predetermined magnitude, usually a medically significant magnitude. When controls are tested, the results are evaluated by combinations of the multiple rules which specify the allowable variance within a set of results. Sets of results can include data from multiple control materials, multiple instruments, and multiple analytical modules within a single laboratory instrument. The suite of rules defines when a process is considered in control and when it may be out of control. The system can be configured to automate the release of patient results while the suite of rules against which the control results are being tested indicates that a process by which the control and patient results are generated is in control, and to automatically block the release of the results as soon as the suite of rules against which the control results are being tested indicates that the process being conducted by the laboratory instrument producing the results is out of control. The system and method according to the invention also support the bracketing mode. As previously noted, in the bracketing mode, patient results are held until results of the testing of one or more controls by the instrument are evaluated by the multi-rule strategy. Once the results of the instrument's testing of the control(s) is(are) tested against the suite of rules and the instrument is determined from this testing to be in control both before and after the patient sample(s) was(were) evaluated, the patient results are released, for example, to a patient results data base.
The system of the present invention provides: a method for selecting and configuring the suite of QC rules against which a particular result or group of results will be tested; an engine that evaluates results as they arrive at the programmable machine; a display of whether the measurement process is in control according to each selected rule of the suite, or whether the measurement process is under caution according to that rule, or whether the measurement process is out of control according to that rule; a means for the operator to set the status of a particular result or group of results with respect to selected criteria independent of rule status—for example, an operator can overwrite the selected rule(s) and always be in control of the process; a visual indication of the condition of statistical quality control testing of the results against each rule—for example, “green”=ok, “yellow”=warning, and “red”=failed when tested against a particular rule; a display of the state of a particular result or group of results with respect to a particular rule; automatic switching of the state of a particular result or group of results when testing of the control(s) associated with that particular result or group of results against a rule indicates that the process by which the result(s) is(are) obtained is or may be out of control; automatic release of validated results generated by the laboratory instrument, for example, into a data base of such results, as long as testing of the control(s) associated with that particular result or group of results against all selected rules indicates that the process by which the result(s) is(are) obtained is in control; when the testing is being conducted in bracketing mode, automatic switching of the state of a particular result or group of results when testing the controls associated with that particular result or group of results against all selected rules indicates that the process by which the result(s) is(are) obtained is in or out of control, respectively, and automatic passage of that(those) result(s) to the data base, or withholding of that (those) result(s) from the data base, respectively, depending upon the state of that particular result or group of results.
The multi-rule quality control testing method and apparatus can be integrated into laboratory system data handling and management software. In the illustrated example, the multi-rule process and apparatus are implemented as components of the LSM, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. In the LSM, information, prompts, etc., are displayed to the operator on screens designed to resemble hanging file folders. The tabs at the tops of the various folders select those folders. Selection of one of the folders causes that screen, its contents, menu, etc., to be displayed to the operator. The screens which are accessed by the multi-rule method and apparatus in the illustrated embodiment include a test status screen which displays the status, for example, in control (indicated by a green circle), caution (indicated by a yellow circle containing an exclamation mark), and out of control (indicated by a red circle containing an “X.” In the illustrated embodiment, the test status screen also illustrates a list of events affecting quality control, violations produced by rule failures, and details of the control results associated with each failure. From this screen, an operator can also manually control the status of a test and view a log of all manual operator QC events and interactions. Any comments added by operators in connection with manual operator QC events and interactions can also be viewed and edited. These comments will indicate by which operator and when the comments were entered, protecting against someone else changing the comment, but permitting adding to the comment. A library of standard comments is also available from which the user can select (a) standard comment(s). Illustrative test status screens are illustrated in FIGS. 1-4. An illustrative test status report is illustrated in Table 1.
TABLE 1
Test and QC Rule Status: (The columns under Within/Across Run/System are printed only if Rules were requested)
ACROSS
WITHIN RUN ACROSS RUN SYSTEM
Test
1•2s R•Ks 2•2s 4•1s Mxbar 2•2s 2of3•2s 4•1s Mxbar R•Ks
Test Instrument State wC wC aC wC aC wC aC wC aC wC aC wC aC wC aC wC aC wC aC
CkMb ELEC1 O O O O O O
Calcium ES001 X ! X O O O N
Creatinin ES002 O O O O O I
O = OK, ! = Warning, X = Error, I = Incomplete
Last Control Results (for user-selected interval): (This table is printed only if Last Results were requested)
Test Instrument Control Result SDI Target SD Date Time
CkMb ELEC1 PPIM 91.3 1.3 81.4 10.3 1/10/96 12:29 PM
PNIM 28.4 1.9 20.6 4.7 1/8/96 9:08 AM
Calcium ES001 PPIM 91.3 1.3 81.4 10.3 1/10/96 12:29 PM
PNIM 28.4 1.9 20.6 4.7 1/8/96 9:08 AM
CPID 43.3 −.04 44.0 1.7 1/9/96 10:27 AM
Creatinin ES001 PPIM 91.3 1.3 81.4 10.3 1/10/96 12:29 PM
QC Event List for CkMb on ELEC1 (for user-selected interval): (This table is printed only if Events were requested)
Event Control Date Time
Violation: 1 × 3s Rule PNIM 1/10/96 12:49 PM
Status Green: JONESMT 1/10/96 12:47 PM
Violation: 2 of 3 × 2s Rule PPIM 1/10/96 12:44 PM
Warning: 4 × 1s Rule PPIM 1/10/96 12:29 PM
Status Green: JONESMT 1/10/96 11:54 PM
Status Red: RICKDJ 1/10/96 11:10 PM
QC Event List for Calcium on ES001 (for user-selected interval): (This style table is printed if Comments were requested)
Event Date Time Control/Comment
Violation: 1 × 3s Rule 1/10/96 12:49 PM PNIM
Appears to be a false rejection (A violation could have a comment)
Status Green: JONESMT 1/10/96 12:47 PM Put in the wrong vial
Violation: 2 of 3 × 2s Rule 1/10/96 12:44 PM PPIM
Warning: 4 × 1s Rule 1/10/96 12:29 PM PPIM
Status Green: JONESMT 1/10/96 11:54 AM Recalibrated and got 3 QC's within 1SD after discovering (and
removing) spider's web covering sensor (Comments wrap as
necessary)
Status Red: RICKDJ 1/10/96 11:10 AM Getting a lot of bad patient results so I assume something is wrong
QC Event List for Creatinin on ES001 (for user-selected interval): (This style table is printed if Details were requested)
Event Date Time Control Result SDI Target SD Date Time
Violation: 1 × 3s Rule 1/10/96 12:49 PM PPIM 91.3 1.3 81.4 10.3 1/10/96 12:29 AM
Status Green: JONESMT 1/10/96 12:47 PM
Violation: 2 of 3 × 2s Rule 1/10/96 12:44 PM PPIM 98.3 2.3 81.4 10.3 1/10/96 12:29 AM
PNIM 28.4 1.9 20.6  4.7 1/8/96 9:08 AM
PPIM 99.6 2.5 81.4 10.3 1/10/96 12:29 AM
QC Event List for Creatinin on ES002 (for user-selected interval): (This style table is printed if Details and Comments were
requested)
Details/Comments
Event Date Time Control Result SDI Target SD Date Time
Violation: 1 × 3s Rule 1/10/96 12:49 PM PPIM 91.3 1.3 81.4 10.3 1/10/96 12:29 AM
Appears to be a false reject
Status Green: JONESMT 1/10/96 12:47 PM Put in the wrong vial
Violation: 2 of 3 × 2s Rule 1/10/96 12:44 PM PPIM 98.3 2.3 81.4 10.3 1/10/96 12:29 PM
PNIM 28.4 1.9 20.6 4.7 1/8/96 9:08 AM
PPIM 99.6 2.5 81.4 10.3 1/10/96 12:29 AM
Warning: 4 × 1s Rule 1/10/96 12:29 PM PPIM 91.3 1.3 81.4 10.3 1/10/96 12:29 PM
PNIM 28.4 1.9 20.6 4.7 1/8/96 9:08 AM
PPIM 91.3 1.3 81.4 10.3 1/10/96 12:29 PM
PNIM 28.4 1.9 20.6 4.7 1/3/96 9:08 AM
Status Green: JONESMT 1/10/96 11:54 AM Recalibrated and got 3 QC's within 1 SD after discovering (and removing)
spider's web covering sensor
Status Red: RICKDJ 1/10/96 11:10 AM Getting a lot of bad patient results so I assume something is wrong
The screens also include a multi-rule QC rules administration screen. Using this screen the operator can select the operating mode for a test, for example, whether the test will be performed as an open run or as a bracketed run. This screen permits the operator to select the run length. If the control result(s) being tested is (are) part of an open run, data from patient samples will be automatically released to a patient result data base if the multi-rule testing of the control result(s) indicates that the process by which the patient and control results are obtained is in control. If the control result(s) being tested is (are) part of a bracketed run, data from patient samples lying within the brackets will be held until the multi-rule testing of the control result(s) which close(s) the run indicate(s) that the process is in control. This screen also permits the operator to select the statistical quality control rules against which the control results are to be tested for QC purposes. This screen also prompts the operator to designate any parameters required to be designated for any selected rule, such as, for example, the k in 1×ks. For rules which are to be applied across systems, that is across different laboratory instruments, this screen permits the operator to select which system will be the reference system for testing. Finally, this screen permits any selected rule to force a test into either a caution or out of control state when testing indicates that the process is out of control. An illustrative multi-rule QC rules administration screen is illustrated in FIG. 5. Illustrative QC rule settings are illustrated in Table 2.
TABLE 2
QC Rule Settings
WITHIN RUN ACROSS
Brac- 1• ACROSS RUN SYSTEM
Instru- Run ket- 2s R•Ks 2•2s 4•1s Mxbar 2•2s 2of3•2s 4•1s Mxbar R•Ks
Test ment Len. ing wC wC aC K wC aC wC aC wC aC K wC aC wC aC wC aC wC aC M wC aC K
CkMb ELEC1 4 W W 2.51 W W 10 W 10
Calcium ES001 6 X W E W 12 E W 12 E 4.00
Cre- ES002 5 W W 2.00 W 10 W W 12
atinine
Calcium ES001 5 X W W 12 W E E 3.20
fT3 ELEC1 4 E E W 10 W E E 12
fT4 ELEC1 3 E W 12 W 2.25
Glucose ES002 3 E W E W 12
T3 ELEC1 2 E W W 8 W 2.75
T4 ELEC1 1 E E 2.20 E W 5 W E E E 11
TBK ES001 3 W W 8 E E E 11
TROPO ES001 4 E 3.00 E W 10 E E 10 E
TSH ES001 2 E W W 8 E W E E
W = QC Warning rule, E = QC Error rule
A control definition screen permits the operator to establish quality control-specific parameters of control materials, such as, for example, mean values and standard deviations of the biologically significant components of those controls. This screen also permits designation of a particular lot of material as a process control lot or study lot. A study lot is a lot which is used in statistical calculations, but not in the multi-rule quality control strategy for controlling the process. Illustrative control definition screens, pages 1 and 2, are illustrated in FIGS. 6-7.
A QC results screen permits the operator to view control results in detail. The operator can exclude or include control results from the long term quality control statistics as well as delete ones which are the result of gross operator errors, such as the misidentification of a material. An illustrative QC results screen is illustrated in FIG. 8.
A patient validation screen permits functions similar to the QC results screen, but also permits the viewing and disposition of patient results in the context of their associated control results. Illustrative patient validation screens, the first screen and a screen displayed when the “more” button is clicked, are illustrated in FIGS. 9-10.
A comment administration screen permits entry of comments which can then be selected from a menu. A comment dialog is presented to the operator for the entry of text, either to add text to an existing comment or to provide a new comment. The method and apparatus of the present invention will typically be configured to automatically present the dialog whenever the operator performs certain actions such as forcing (a) result(s) into an out of control condition or into an in control condition, excluding (a) control result(s), and so on. This screen is intended to encourage the operator to enter comments to help document and explain such actions. This supports a laboratory policy of encouraging operators to comment by offering an opportunity for them to do so, or enforcing the entry of comments where appropriate. An illustrative comment administration screen is illustrated in FIG. 11.
A user access rights administration screen permits the system to be tailored to varying levels of access by different operators. For example, some operators may be permitted to access all system screens while others are permitted to access only certain screens. An illustrative user access rights administration screen is illustrated in FIG. 12.
Two background modules provide most of the internal functions of the multi-rule QC system. One of these, the run module, monitors the receipt of control and patient results from the various laboratory instruments whose results the system is monitoring, passes control results to the other module, a rules evaluation module, and modifies the status of a test according to the evaluation results. After checking patient results for normal ranges, etc., the run module can automatically release a patient result if the corresponding test status is in control and the rule against which the associated control is tested is operating in open run mode. If the rule is operating in bracketing mode, the run module does not release a patient result until the module has received and tested sufficient control results to establish that the entire bracketed run is in control. The run module also provides certain services to the various screens to support operator actions, such as forcing a control result into an out of control condition or into an in control condition, deleting or excluding a result, and so on, and updating information for display on all screens.
The rule evaluation module is the background module which is responsible for evaluating control results against the selected QC rules. This module keeps sufficient information about the most recent control results to be able to evaluate each control result against all selected rules as each control result is received. The rule evaluation module passes this information to the run module where patient results are completely evaluated as soon as they are received from the various laboratory instrument interfaces. Except when bracketing mode is enabled, the system continuously evaluates and releases patient results to the patient results data base.
The flow diagram illustrated in FIG. 13 illustrates validation of results obtained from a laboratory instrument through an appropriate interface. As each result is provided to the system of the invention, it is identified as either a control result or a patient result. If the result is identified as a control result, it is next determined whether the result is a process control result. If the result is identified as a process control result, it is tested against the selected statistical quality control rules. See FIG. 14. If the system and method are not operating in bracketing mode, results passing testing against the selected statistical quality control rules are supplied to the QC test status data base. If the system and method are operating in bracketing mode, and the end of the bracket has not yet been reached, the results are added to the long term quality control data base. If the system and method are operating in bracketing mode, and the end of the bracket has been reached, all patient results within the bracket are either blocked or released, depending upon whether the control results passed testing against the selected statistical quality control rules. All control results are added to the long term quality control data base. The system and method then return for evaluation of the next result. If the control result is not a process control result, it is added to the long term QC data base. If the result is a patient result, it is validated technically. See FIG. 15. Once validated technically, it is validated against the QC test status. See FIG. 16. The system and method then return for evaluation of the next result. Finally, if a result is neither a control result nor a patient result, an error is indicated.
In the application of the rules, FIG. 14, the decision is first reached whether more rules are selected or configured. If not, the system and method have finished testing the result against the selected rules. If so, the system and method get the next rule against which the result is to be tested. The system and method determine whether all results required by the rule to conduct the indicated test are available. If not, the status of the test is indicated as incomplete, and the system and method return to determine if all results required by the rule to conduct the indicated test are available. If so, the system and method determine whether the rule has been violated by the result. If not, the process is indicated as being in control with respect to that particular rule, and the system and method return to test the result against the next rule. If the rule is determined to have been violated, the severity of the violation is ascertained. There are, as noted above, two levels of severity, caution and out of control. If the process is adjudged out of control, an indication of the out of control status of the result with respect to that rule is produced, the status of the test with respect to that rule is stored in the QC test status data, and the system and method return to test the result against the next rule. If the process is adjudged to be in a caution condition, an indication of the caution status of the result with respect to that rule is produced, and the status of the QC test with respect to that rule is determined. If the QC test status is already in an out of control condition, the system and method return to test the result against the next rule. If the QC test status is not in an out of control condition, an indication of the caution status of the result with respect to that rule is produced, the status of the test with respect to that rule is stored in the QC test status data, and the system and method return to test the result against the next rule. It should be noted that the system and method will not reduce the severity of system status with respect to a selected rule, for example, change an indication of the system status with respect to a selected rule from red to yellow, red to green, or yellow to green. An operator must intervene to achieve this. However, the system and method will increase the severity of the system status with respect to a selected rule, for example, change it from green to red, green to yellow, or yellow to red, automatically whenever such action is warranted by the results of testing.
In quality control test status validation, FIG. 16, the system and method first determine if the QC test status is indicated as out of control. If so, a result is marked with a QC error and blocked. The result is saved to the data base and the QC test status validation is complete. If the QC test status is not indicated as being out of control, the timing of the result is ascertained. If the result is prior in time to the most recent determination, based upon testing of a control, that the process is in control, the result is blocked. Underlying this action is the assumption that the QC test must have indicated that the process being tested was out of control prior to the most recent event indicated to be in control. If the result is not prior in time to the most recent event indicated as being in control, the system and method next determine whether the result has been blocked. If so, the result is saved to the data base. If not, the system and method next determine whether bracketing is enabled. If so, the result's state is set to QC pending, pending testing of the bracket closing control's(s') result(s) against the selected rule(s). The result is then saved to the data base. If bracketing is not enabled, the result is released to be saved to the data base. Once the result is saved to the data base, QC test status validation is complete.
In technical validation, FIG. 15, the system and method first determine whether the result has been generated on a laboratory instrument already flagged for some reason. This might occur, for example, if the operator already is aware that the instrument is in need of service, etc. If the instrument has already been flagged, the result is marked “instrument flagged,” and the result is blocked from passage to the data base. If the instrument is not flagged, the test is next validated against the normal ranges for the test. The best matching normal range for the test is identified, and the test is validated against that range. If no normal range for the test is identified, the result is so marked, and, depending on the setting of a file in the system, the result may be blocked. If a normal range for the test is identified, the result is marked, and, depending on the setting of a file in the system, the result may be blocked. After the test is validated against the normal range, or, where no normal range can be found, the result is marked as having no normal range, or where the test is not validated against a normal range, the test is next validated against prior results for the same patient. If there are no prior results in the patient data base for the patient, the result is so marked. If there are prior results in the data base for the patient, the percentage change is checked against the allowable change, the result is marked with that change, and, depending on the setting of a configuration file in the system, the result may be blocked. Once the result is marked with a percentage change, or, where no prior patient data exists, marked to indicate that such marking is not possible, or where the test is not validated against prior patient results, the technical validation is complete.

Claims (20)

What is claimed is:
1. A system for analyzing results of determinations of concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions, the system consisting essentially of a programmable machine, a program executable on the machine for testing the results against a set of multiple rules selected by a system operator, and for producing indications to the operator of the results of the tests, an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of control solutions, and an interface for relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions to the programmable machine to be tested by the program.
2. A system for analyzing results of determinations of concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions, the system including a programmable machine, a program executable on the machine for testing the results against selected rules from among a set of multiple, operator-selectable rules, and for producing indications to the operator of the results of the tests, an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of control solutions, and an interface for relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions to the programmable machine to be tested by the program, the program for testing the results against selected rules including a program for testing a result of a first determination of the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a first control solution against a first subset of the set of multiple rules, and subsequently testing a result of at least one of: a second determination of the concentration of the first medically significant component of the first sample of the first control solution; the concentration of a second medically significant component of the first sample of the first control solution; the concentration of the first medically significant component of a second sample of the first control solution; and, the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a second control solution, against at least one of the first subset and a second subset of the set of multiple rules.
3. The system of claim 2 wherein the instrument includes an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids.
4. A system for analyzing results of determinations of concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions, the system including a programmable machine, a program executable on the machine for testing the results against selected rules from among a set of multiple, operator-selectable rules, and for producing indications to the operator of the results of the tests, an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of control solutions, and an interface for relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions to the programmable machine to be tested by the program, the instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of control solutions including an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different control solutions, and the program including a program for instructing the instrument to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different control solutions.
5. The system of claim 4 wherein the instrument includes an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids.
6. A system for analyzing results of determinations of concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions, the system including a programmable machine, a program executable on the machine for testing the results against selected rules from among a set of multiple, operator-selectable rules, and for producing indications to the operator of the results of the tests, a first instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of control solutions, a first interface for relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions from the first instrument to the programmable machine to be tested by the program, a second instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of control solutions, and a second interface for relaying the results of determinations by the second instrument to the programmable machine to be tested by the program.
7. The system of claim 6 wherein the program for testing the results against selected rules from among a set of multiple rules includes a program for testing a result of a first determination of the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a first control solution against a first subset of the set of multiple rules, and subsequently testing a result of at least one of: a second determination of the concentration of the first medically significant component of the first sample of the first control solution; the concentration of a second medically significant component of the first sample of the first control solution; the concentration of the first medically significant component of a second sample of the first control solution; and, the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a second control solution, against at least one of the first subset and a second subset of the set of multiple rules.
8. The system of claim 6 wherein the first instrument and the second instrument respectively include: an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions; and, a second instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different body fluids and control solutions, and the program comprises a program for selectively instructing one of the first instrument and the second instrument to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different control solutions, the system further including a third interface for relaying instructions from the programmable machine to the one of the first instrument and the second instrument.
9. The system of claim 8 wherein the program for testing the results against the set of multiple rules includes a program for testing a result of a first determination of the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a first control solution against a first subset of the set of multiple rules and subsequently testing a result of at least one of: a second determination of the concentration of the first medically significant component of the first sample of the first control solution; the concentration of a second medically significant component of the first sample of the first control solution; the concentration of the first medically significant component of a second sample of the first control solution; and, the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a second control solution, against at least one of the first subset and a second subset of the set of multiple rules.
10. The system of claim 6 wherein the instrument includes an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids.
11. The system of claim 7 wherein the instrument includes an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids.
12. The system of claim 8 wherein the instrument includes an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids.
13. The system of claim 9 wherein the instrument includes an instrument for sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids.
14. A method for analyzing results of determinations of concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions, the method consisting essentially of providing a programmable machine, having an operator select a set of multiple rules against which the results are to be tested, having the programmable machine test the results against the set of multiple rules by sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids and control solutions and relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions to the programmable machine to be tested by the program and having the programmable machine produce indications to the operator of the results of the tests.
15. A method for analyzing results of determinations of concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions, the method including providing a programmable machine, programming the programmable machine with a set of multiple, operator-selectable rules against selected ones of which the results may be tested, selecting from among the set of multiple rules a subset of all or fewer than all of the rules against which the operator desires to test the results, sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of control solutions, relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions to the programmable machine to be tested, testing the results on the machine against the subset of rules, and producing indications to the operator of the results of the tests, testing the results against multiple rules including testing a result of a first determination of the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a first control solution against a first subset of the set of multiple rules and subsequently testing a result of at least one of: a second determination; the concentration of a second medically significant component; a second sample; and, a second control solution against at least one of the first subset and a second subset of the set of multiple rules.
16. The method of claim 15 further including sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids, and relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the body fluids to the programmable machine.
17. A method for analyzing results of determinations of concentrations of medically significant components of control solutions, the method including providing a programmable machine, programming the programmable machine with a set of multiple, operator-selectable rules against selected ones of which the results may be tested, selecting from among the set of multiple rules a subset of all or fewer than all of the rules against which an operator desires to test the results, sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of control solutions, relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the control solutions to the programmable machine to be tested against the subset of rules, testing the results on the machine against the subset of rules, and producing indications to the operator of the results of the tests, sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of control solutions including sequentially determining the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different control solutions in response to instructions to determine the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different control solutions, and instructing the determination of the concentrations of different medically significant components of samples of different control solutions.
18. The method of claim 17 wherein testing the results against the set of multiple rules comprises testing a result of a first determination of the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a first control solution against a first subset of the set of multiple rules and subsequently testing a result of at least one of: a second determination of the concentration of the first medically significant component of the first sample of the first control solution; the concentration of a second medically significant component of the first sample of the first control solution; the concentration of the first medically significant component of a second sample of the first control solution; and, the concentration of a first medically significant component of a first sample of a second control solution, against at least one of the first subset and a second subset of the set of multiple rules.
19. The method of claim 17 further including sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids, and relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the body fluids to the programmable machine.
20. The method of claim 18 further including sequentially determining the concentrations of medically significant components of multiple samples of body fluids, and relaying the results of the determinations of the concentrations of the medically significant components of the body fluids to the programmable machine.
US09/052,613 1998-03-31 1998-03-31 Multi-rule quality control method and apparatus Expired - Fee Related US6269276B1 (en)

Priority Applications (5)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US09/052,613 US6269276B1 (en) 1998-03-31 1998-03-31 Multi-rule quality control method and apparatus
CA002266960A CA2266960A1 (en) 1998-03-31 1999-03-25 Multi-rule quality control method and apparatus
EP99105107A EP0962872A3 (en) 1998-03-31 1999-03-25 Multi-rule quality control method and apparatus
JP11084876A JPH11326333A (en) 1998-03-31 1999-03-26 Method and apparatus for managing multiregular accuracy
JP11129023A JPH11337555A (en) 1998-03-31 1999-03-31 Multi-rule quality control method, and apparatus therefor

Applications Claiming Priority (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US09/052,613 US6269276B1 (en) 1998-03-31 1998-03-31 Multi-rule quality control method and apparatus

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
US6269276B1 true US6269276B1 (en) 2001-07-31

Family

ID=21978750

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US09/052,613 Expired - Fee Related US6269276B1 (en) 1998-03-31 1998-03-31 Multi-rule quality control method and apparatus

Country Status (4)

Country Link
US (1) US6269276B1 (en)
EP (1) EP0962872A3 (en)
JP (2) JPH11326333A (en)
CA (1) CA2266960A1 (en)

Cited By (25)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
JP2000227433A (en) * 1999-02-04 2000-08-15 Hitachi Ltd Method and device for automatic analysis
US6442714B1 (en) * 1999-03-17 2002-08-27 Cisco Technology Web-based integrated testing and reporting system
US20030159133A1 (en) * 2001-10-26 2003-08-21 International Business Machines Corporation Method and system for tracing and displaying execution of nested functions
US20040064278A1 (en) * 2002-09-30 2004-04-01 Robbins Sanford H. Method and system for random sampling
US20040220761A1 (en) * 2003-05-02 2004-11-04 John Yundt-Pacheco System and method for integrating the internal and external quality control programs of a laboratory
US20050037502A1 (en) * 2003-08-11 2005-02-17 Miller Kerry Lynn Automated quality control protocols in a multi-analyzer system
US7055098B2 (en) 1999-02-19 2006-05-30 Lucent Technologies Inc. Dynamic display of data item evaluation
US20060155501A1 (en) * 2004-11-17 2006-07-13 Eckhard Hempel Method, apparatus, system and computer program product for selection of a static evaluation method for an empirical examination of measurement series
US20070027648A1 (en) * 2005-07-05 2007-02-01 Sysmex Corporation Clinical testing information processing apparatus, clinical testing information processing method, and analyzing system
US20070072299A1 (en) * 2005-09-12 2007-03-29 Toshihide Orihashi Automatc analyzer
US20070183926A1 (en) * 2006-02-09 2007-08-09 Sysmex Corporation Sample measuring apparatus
US20080154530A1 (en) * 2006-09-01 2008-06-26 Murray David W Method for normalized test line limits with measurement uncertainty
US20110169836A1 (en) * 2008-09-03 2011-07-14 Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation Automatic analyzer
US8029443B2 (en) 2003-07-15 2011-10-04 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. Glucose measuring device integrated into a holster for a personal area network device
US20120005150A1 (en) * 2010-07-02 2012-01-05 Idexx Laboratories, Inc. Automated calibration method and system for a diagnostic analyzer
CN102483423A (en) * 2009-09-28 2012-05-30 株式会社日立高新技术 Automatic Analyzing Device, Information Display Method Thereof, And Information Display System
US8460243B2 (en) 2003-06-10 2013-06-11 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. Glucose measuring module and insulin pump combination
US20140244301A1 (en) * 2013-02-22 2014-08-28 Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. Method and system for transmitting result of examination of specimen from medical device to destination through mobile device
US20150189001A1 (en) * 2013-02-22 2015-07-02 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Method and system for transmitting result of examination of specimen from medical device to destination
US10963417B2 (en) 2004-06-04 2021-03-30 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. Systems and methods for managing diabetes care data
US10984366B2 (en) * 2013-03-15 2021-04-20 Abbott Point Of Care Inc. Management system for point of care testing
US11195611B2 (en) 2016-08-29 2021-12-07 Beckman Coulter, Inc. Remote data analysis and diagnosis
US11441997B2 (en) * 2018-03-30 2022-09-13 Idexx Laboratories, Inc. Quality control for point-of-care diagnostic systems
US11534089B2 (en) 2011-02-28 2022-12-27 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. Devices, systems, and methods associated with analyte monitoring devices and devices incorporating the same
US11562514B2 (en) 2018-09-07 2023-01-24 Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Inc. Instrument analyzers, data displays, and display methods

Families Citing this family (11)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
JP3849343B2 (en) * 1998-04-21 2006-11-22 株式会社日立製作所 Automatic analyzer
JP4950384B2 (en) * 2000-03-28 2012-06-13 株式会社東芝 Medical diagnostic imaging apparatus and security management method thereof
JP3760806B2 (en) * 2001-06-25 2006-03-29 株式会社日立製作所 Analysis result management method and apparatus
EP1933247B1 (en) * 2001-08-24 2016-10-05 Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. Biometric quality control process
US8099257B2 (en) 2001-08-24 2012-01-17 Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. Biometric quality control process
DE10253700B4 (en) * 2002-11-18 2005-11-17 Siemens Ag Method for performing a quality control for an analysis process and use of the method
JP4871615B2 (en) * 2006-03-07 2012-02-08 株式会社日立ハイテクノロジーズ Automatic analyzer
JP4511512B2 (en) * 2006-12-22 2010-07-28 シスメックス株式会社 User interface for analyzer and analyzer
US8112232B2 (en) 2007-02-02 2012-02-07 Beckman Coulter, Inc. System and method for autoverifying laboratory test results
US8868353B2 (en) * 2007-02-02 2014-10-21 Beckman Coulter, Inc. System and method for testing autoverification rules
US8589081B2 (en) * 2009-07-24 2013-11-19 Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. System and method to determine sigma of a clinical diagnostic process

Citations (15)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4061469A (en) * 1974-12-06 1977-12-06 Hycel, Inc. Calibration in a blood analyzer
US4071891A (en) * 1976-04-30 1978-01-31 Barrows George H Electronic calculator - register for hematology differentials
US4967381A (en) 1985-04-30 1990-10-30 Prometrix Corporation Process control interface system for managing measurement data
US5473551A (en) 1993-02-26 1995-12-05 Sato; Takeshi Automatic analyzer
DE4418888A1 (en) 1994-05-30 1995-12-07 Siemens Ag Quality management of prodn. processes using statistical quality control
US5546312A (en) 1993-09-20 1996-08-13 Texas Instruments Incorporated Use of spatial models for simultaneous control of various non-uniformity metrics
JPH0943245A (en) 1995-07-28 1997-02-14 Shimadzu Corp Automatic calibration method of automatic analyzer
EP0768522A2 (en) 1995-10-16 1997-04-16 Elf Antar France Method for tracking and checking the operation of an analyser and of a production unit connected to it
US5633166A (en) * 1995-01-19 1997-05-27 Mds Health Group Limited Method of analyzing medical specimens with improved length of analytical run determination
WO1997042588A1 (en) 1996-05-07 1997-11-13 Westgard Quality Corporation Automatic selection of statistical quality control procedures
JPH102902A (en) 1996-06-14 1998-01-06 Toshiba Corp Autoanalyzer
EP0871034A2 (en) 1997-04-10 1998-10-14 Hitachi, Ltd. Automatic analyzer and support system therefor
JPH10339732A (en) 1997-04-10 1998-12-22 Hitachi Ltd Automatic analytical device and its supporting system
JPH11142412A (en) 1997-11-05 1999-05-28 Hitachi Ltd Automatic analyzer
US6032059A (en) * 1995-12-19 2000-02-29 Abbott Laboratories Device for the detection of analyte and administration of a therapeutic substance

Patent Citations (18)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4061469A (en) * 1974-12-06 1977-12-06 Hycel, Inc. Calibration in a blood analyzer
US4071891A (en) * 1976-04-30 1978-01-31 Barrows George H Electronic calculator - register for hematology differentials
US4967381A (en) 1985-04-30 1990-10-30 Prometrix Corporation Process control interface system for managing measurement data
US5473551A (en) 1993-02-26 1995-12-05 Sato; Takeshi Automatic analyzer
US5546312A (en) 1993-09-20 1996-08-13 Texas Instruments Incorporated Use of spatial models for simultaneous control of various non-uniformity metrics
DE4418888A1 (en) 1994-05-30 1995-12-07 Siemens Ag Quality management of prodn. processes using statistical quality control
US5633166A (en) * 1995-01-19 1997-05-27 Mds Health Group Limited Method of analyzing medical specimens with improved length of analytical run determination
JPH0943245A (en) 1995-07-28 1997-02-14 Shimadzu Corp Automatic calibration method of automatic analyzer
EP0768522A2 (en) 1995-10-16 1997-04-16 Elf Antar France Method for tracking and checking the operation of an analyser and of a production unit connected to it
JPH09178756A (en) 1995-10-16 1997-07-11 Elf Antar Fr Analyzer and method for monitoring and controlling operation of production unit connected with analyzer
US6128544A (en) 1995-10-16 2000-10-03 Elf Antar France Process for monitoring and control of the operation of an analyzer and of a manufacturing unit to which it is linked
US6032059A (en) * 1995-12-19 2000-02-29 Abbott Laboratories Device for the detection of analyte and administration of a therapeutic substance
WO1997042588A1 (en) 1996-05-07 1997-11-13 Westgard Quality Corporation Automatic selection of statistical quality control procedures
US5937364A (en) * 1996-05-07 1999-08-10 Westgard Quality Corporation Automatic selection of statistical quality control procedures
JPH102902A (en) 1996-06-14 1998-01-06 Toshiba Corp Autoanalyzer
EP0871034A2 (en) 1997-04-10 1998-10-14 Hitachi, Ltd. Automatic analyzer and support system therefor
JPH10339732A (en) 1997-04-10 1998-12-22 Hitachi Ltd Automatic analytical device and its supporting system
JPH11142412A (en) 1997-11-05 1999-05-28 Hitachi Ltd Automatic analyzer

Non-Patent Citations (10)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
A Multi-Rule Shewart Chart for Quality Control in Clinical Chemistry, James O. Westgard et al., Clinical Chemistry 27/3, pp. 493-501, 1981.
Cost-Effective Quality Control: Managing the Quality and Productivity of Analytical Processes, James O. Westgard and Patricia L. Barry, With a Foreword by Royden N. Rand, AACC Press, 1986.
Lesson of the Month: QC-Multirule Interpretation, James O. Westgard, Ph.D, WesTgard(TM) Quality Corporation, 1998.
Lesson of the Month: QC-Multirule Interpretation, James O. Westgard, Ph.D, WesTgard™ Quality Corporation, 1998.
OPSpecs(R) Manual, Operating Specifications for Precision, Accuracy and Quality Control, Expanded Edition, WesTgard(R) Quality Corporation, 1996.
OPSpecs® Manual, Operating Specifications for Precision, Accuracy and Quality Control, Expanded Edition, WesTgard® Quality Corporation, 1996.
Planning and Validating QC Procedures, Workshop Manual, Second Edition, James O. Westgard, Ph.D., WesTgard(R) Quality Corporation, 1996.
Planning and Validating QC Procedures, Workshop Manual, Second Edition, James O. Westgard, Ph.D., WesTgard® Quality Corporation, 1996.
QC Validator(R) with Automatic QC Selection, Program Manual, Version 2.0, WesTgard(R) Quality Corporation, 1996.
QC Validator® with Automatic QC Selection, Program Manual, Version 2.0, WesTgard® Quality Corporation, 1996.

Cited By (45)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
JP2000227433A (en) * 1999-02-04 2000-08-15 Hitachi Ltd Method and device for automatic analysis
US7055098B2 (en) 1999-02-19 2006-05-30 Lucent Technologies Inc. Dynamic display of data item evaluation
US6442714B1 (en) * 1999-03-17 2002-08-27 Cisco Technology Web-based integrated testing and reporting system
US20030159133A1 (en) * 2001-10-26 2003-08-21 International Business Machines Corporation Method and system for tracing and displaying execution of nested functions
US7120901B2 (en) * 2001-10-26 2006-10-10 International Business Machines Corporation Method and system for tracing and displaying execution of nested functions
US20040064278A1 (en) * 2002-09-30 2004-04-01 Robbins Sanford H. Method and system for random sampling
US6922646B2 (en) 2002-09-30 2005-07-26 Randomperfect, Llc Method and system for random sampling
CN1735809A (en) * 2003-05-02 2006-02-15 比奥-雷德实验室股份有限公司 System and method for integrating the internal and external quality control programs of a laboratory
CN1735809B (en) * 2003-05-02 2014-07-16 比奥-雷德实验室股份有限公司 System and method for integrating the internal and external quality control programs of a laboratory
US20040220761A1 (en) * 2003-05-02 2004-11-04 John Yundt-Pacheco System and method for integrating the internal and external quality control programs of a laboratory
US7467054B2 (en) * 2003-05-02 2008-12-16 Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. System and method for integrating the internal and external quality control programs of a laboratory
US8460243B2 (en) 2003-06-10 2013-06-11 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. Glucose measuring module and insulin pump combination
US8029443B2 (en) 2003-07-15 2011-10-04 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. Glucose measuring device integrated into a holster for a personal area network device
US6984527B2 (en) 2003-08-11 2006-01-10 Dade Behring Inc. Automated quality control protocols in a multi-analyzer system
US20050037502A1 (en) * 2003-08-11 2005-02-17 Miller Kerry Lynn Automated quality control protocols in a multi-analyzer system
US11507530B2 (en) 2004-06-04 2022-11-22 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. Systems and methods for managing diabetes care data
US10963417B2 (en) 2004-06-04 2021-03-30 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. Systems and methods for managing diabetes care data
US11182332B2 (en) 2004-06-04 2021-11-23 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. Systems and methods for managing diabetes care data
US7386419B2 (en) * 2004-11-17 2008-06-10 Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Method, apparatus, system and computer program product for selection of a static evaluation method for an empirical examination of measurement series
US20060155501A1 (en) * 2004-11-17 2006-07-13 Eckhard Hempel Method, apparatus, system and computer program product for selection of a static evaluation method for an empirical examination of measurement series
US20070027648A1 (en) * 2005-07-05 2007-02-01 Sysmex Corporation Clinical testing information processing apparatus, clinical testing information processing method, and analyzing system
US20070072299A1 (en) * 2005-09-12 2007-03-29 Toshihide Orihashi Automatc analyzer
US8600689B2 (en) 2005-09-12 2013-12-03 Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation Automatic analyzer
EP1762850A3 (en) * 2005-09-12 2010-11-17 Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation Automatic analyzer
US20070183926A1 (en) * 2006-02-09 2007-08-09 Sysmex Corporation Sample measuring apparatus
US20080154530A1 (en) * 2006-09-01 2008-06-26 Murray David W Method for normalized test line limits with measurement uncertainty
US9164112B2 (en) 2008-09-03 2015-10-20 Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation Automatic analyzer
US20110169836A1 (en) * 2008-09-03 2011-07-14 Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation Automatic analyzer
US9797827B2 (en) 2008-09-03 2017-10-24 Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation Automatic analyzer
CN102483423A (en) * 2009-09-28 2012-05-30 株式会社日立高新技术 Automatic Analyzing Device, Information Display Method Thereof, And Information Display System
CN102483423B (en) * 2009-09-28 2014-11-05 株式会社日立高新技术 Automatic analyzing device, information display method thereof, and information display system
US8645306B2 (en) * 2010-07-02 2014-02-04 Idexx Laboratories, Inc. Automated calibration method and system for a diagnostic analyzer
US20120005150A1 (en) * 2010-07-02 2012-01-05 Idexx Laboratories, Inc. Automated calibration method and system for a diagnostic analyzer
US11534089B2 (en) 2011-02-28 2022-12-27 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. Devices, systems, and methods associated with analyte monitoring devices and devices incorporating the same
US10411794B2 (en) * 2013-02-22 2019-09-10 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Method and system for transmitting result of examination of specimen from medical device to destination through mobile device
US20140244301A1 (en) * 2013-02-22 2014-08-28 Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. Method and system for transmitting result of examination of specimen from medical device to destination through mobile device
US20150189001A1 (en) * 2013-02-22 2015-07-02 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Method and system for transmitting result of examination of specimen from medical device to destination
US10404784B2 (en) * 2013-02-22 2019-09-03 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Method and system for transmitting result of examination of specimen from medical device to destination
US10984366B2 (en) * 2013-03-15 2021-04-20 Abbott Point Of Care Inc. Management system for point of care testing
US11488088B2 (en) 2013-03-15 2022-11-01 Abbott Point Of Care Inc. Management system for point of care testing
US11195611B2 (en) 2016-08-29 2021-12-07 Beckman Coulter, Inc. Remote data analysis and diagnosis
US11955230B2 (en) 2016-08-29 2024-04-09 Beckman Coulter, Inc. Remote data analysis and diagnosis
US11441997B2 (en) * 2018-03-30 2022-09-13 Idexx Laboratories, Inc. Quality control for point-of-care diagnostic systems
US11887727B2 (en) 2018-03-30 2024-01-30 Idexx Laboratories, Inc. Quality control for point-of-care diagnostic systems
US11562514B2 (en) 2018-09-07 2023-01-24 Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Inc. Instrument analyzers, data displays, and display methods

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
JPH11326333A (en) 1999-11-26
CA2266960A1 (en) 1999-09-30
EP0962872A3 (en) 1999-12-15
EP0962872A2 (en) 1999-12-08
JPH11337555A (en) 1999-12-10

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US6269276B1 (en) Multi-rule quality control method and apparatus
US11675341B2 (en) Method and system for performing quality control on a diagnostic analyzer
CA2677378C (en) System and method for testing autoverification rules
AU2008214053B2 (en) System and method for autoverifying laboratory test results
EP1107159B1 (en) Quality control method and device therefor
EP0973115A2 (en) User Interface for a biomedical analyzer system
CN110023764A (en) For analyzing the malfunction prediction of the automatic analyzer of biological sample
US11002749B2 (en) Calibration method
US7089139B2 (en) Method and apparatus for configuration of automated debug of in-circuit tests
US20070027648A1 (en) Clinical testing information processing apparatus, clinical testing information processing method, and analyzing system
CN106339569B (en) Method and device for judging sample test result abnormity
CN114446417A (en) Configuration method, device, equipment and storage medium of multi-mode constraint rule
CN111406294B (en) Automatically generating rules for laboratory instruments
JP2011075468A (en) Specimen inspection apparatus
EP3945527A1 (en) Test result auto verification
JP2000171469A (en) Automatic analyzing apparatus
US20200219594A1 (en) Quantification of sequencing instruments and reagents for use in molecular diagnostic methods
Favaloro et al. Post-analytical issues in hemostasis and thrombosis testing: an update
Munir et al. National External Quality Assurance Program Pakistan (NEQAPP)–a milestone in proficiency testing in Pakistan
Powers Laboratory quality control requirements should be based on risk management principles
Reilly-Stitt et al. Internal Quality Control in Hemostasis Assays
JPS58222343A (en) Automatic discriminating system of difference of data
CN112782414A (en) Sample analysis system and setting method thereof
Morihara et al. Introduction of the XE-2100 online QC system
Friedrichs et al. Using an independent quality control software program, EZ Runs™, to monitor quality control procedures for a bench‐top coagulation analyzer

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AS Assignment

Owner name: BOEHRINGER MANNHEIM CORPORATION, INDIANA

Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:AKHAVAN, KAMRAN;RUSU, LAURIAN I.;SCARR, GARY K.;AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:009283/0444;SIGNING DATES FROM 19980421 TO 19980515

AS Assignment

Owner name: ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION, INDIANA

Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:BOEHRINGER MANNHEIM CORPORATION;REEL/FRAME:009730/0414

Effective date: 19981211

REMI Maintenance fee reminder mailed
LAPS Lapse for failure to pay maintenance fees
STCH Information on status: patent discontinuation

Free format text: PATENT EXPIRED DUE TO NONPAYMENT OF MAINTENANCE FEES UNDER 37 CFR 1.362

FP Lapsed due to failure to pay maintenance fee

Effective date: 20050731